Good info, but all I've ever needed to see was Auburn going 12-0 in the SEC and not being given the opportunity to play for the national championship.

 

I vividly remember a debate that took place during the 04-05 season in which Auburn went undefeated. It was between Kirk Herbstreit & Jay Bilas--about whether football or basketball was better at the college level. Herbstreit (who I really like) made the same old argument about how "every game counts" in football, whereas the regular season in basketball isn't nearly as important. In other words, every week is the playoffs in football.

 

Bilas's response was classic & totally silenced Herbie--"Tell that to Auburn."

 

I said elsewhere--it's ridiculous in any sport where a team can do undefeated and not be given an opportunity to play for a national championship.

 

:thumb:

 

That "it all works itself out in the end or the BCS gets it right argument" is ridiculous.

 

There's no way of knowing if the BCS gets it right. They pick two teams that are obviously deserving of a title shot every season...unfortunately, there are many seasons when there are clearly more than 2 teams that should get that opportunity. How is that "getting it right"?

 

'Bama is fine. For starters, they did one important thing...if you're gonna lose, do it earlier in the year. I don't expect Oklahoma and Oregon to both finish undefeated...at least one of those teams will lose, and that's all Alabama needs at this point. If they win out, they'll leapfrog all the non-BCS schools whether they lose or not.

I'm not saying it is perfect, but it isn't as bad as you all make it seem. And your info is really good, but your "no brainers" and your "arguments" are nothing more than your opinion. If they go to a playoff and put the BCS conference champs in, are we not going to argue that the Big East isn't better than the MWC and shouldn't be in? What if the ACC and Big East play each other in the first round and you have Louisville and VTech play and they get the winner of Bama and Nebraska...then we argue about "well VTech got to play the Big East champ...it is never going to be perfect. And, your infor up there once said the BCS punishes teams that lose late and once said LSU shouldn't have been in with 2 losses. 1 of their losses was very late.

 

Exactly, you are making my point. It is all based on opinion and I don't like a champion based on the opinion of coaches and a computer program. I want the top 8 teams to play on the field. This is where the BCS should stop. Pick the top 8 teams, put them in a playoff. As teams lose, they fill the slots automatically given to their conferences for bowls, whatever that be. So, yes, you could lose in the semi finals and still play in the Rose Bowl. That way the bowl sponsors don't lose money, the NCAA makes a lot more, and the fans get a real champion.

Exactly, you are making my point. It is all based on opinion and I don't like a champion based on the opinion of coaches and a computer program. I want the top 8 teams to play on the field. This is where the BCS should stop. Pick the top 8 teams, put them in a playoff. As teams lose, they fill the slots automatically given to their conferences for bowls, whatever that be. So, yes, you could lose in the semi finals and still play in the Rose Bowl. That way the bowl sponsors don't lose money, the NCAA makes a lot more, and the fans get a real champion.

 

I agree there SHOULD be a playoff, but it still will not solve the problem you bring up. 8 teams in...who gets in? Is it only Conf Champions? If so, which conferences? I just don't think it is that cut and dry.

I don't even think the BCS should pick the top 8...I think the winners of the 6 major conferences should get automatic bids and then they could use the BCS or something like the NCAA selection committee in hoops to select the two at-large bids. JMO

I agree there SHOULD be a playoff, but it still will not solve the problem you bring up. 8 teams in...who gets in? Is it only Conf Champions? If so, which conferences? I just don't think it is that cut and dry.

 

Agreed, nothing is perfect, but we can agree that, at least w/ a top 8 you give the top teams from outside of the BCS conferences a chance if they are good enough. In a perfect world, the ACC and Big East champs wouldn't make the BCS games due to automatic qualification, they would have to earn it. That, however, is reaching too far. BCS conference champs and 2 at-larges.

Agreed, nothing is perfect, but we can agree that, at least w/ a top 8 you give the top teams from outside of the BCS conferences a chance if they are good enough. In a perfect world, the ACC and Big East champs wouldn't make the BCS games due to automatic qualification, they would have to earn it. That, however, is reaching too far. BCS conference champs and 2 at-larges.

 

How about a provision within the 2 at-large bids? If a Non-AQ team is in the top 5 they automatically get one.

 

And/Or since the smaller conferences like the MWC do not have a championship game if two of them are in the top 5, and there is a higher ranked non-BCS conference champion above one or both of them, they have a play in game during conference championship week to determine who gets the final atlarge bid? This would allow Boise, TCU, Utah, and even Notre Dame a fair chance at a National Championship, because if they're are only 2 at-larges, in most years I think the 2nd best team in the SEC and either the 2nd best team in the Big 12, Big 10 or Pac 10 is going to jump them.

 

As for people who complain about a team having a harder road or an easier road in a playoff bracket, I think that is garbage. To win a champinship in a playoff system you're eventually going to have to play and beat the best. Who cares if Bama/OU is a matchup in round 1 when VT plays a team like WVU? The best team will be the one holding the trophy at the end and that's all that matters. Whether a team finished 2nd or out in the 1st round it really doesn't mean anything.......they still lost.